I think he means literally taking 60 frames and averaging them together to get 24p. The benefit being a higher signal to noise ratio. I'm not sure if it would work with averaging images that aren't the same though. I know it works in still photography but in that case the scene doesn't change (usually).

EDIT: Gah, hate it when that happens :P

Better get to work on those filters, Grahame! I'm going to need them on my new 23 inch HD iMAC! *L*

One good thing about using pixelshift is that you can user larger photodiodes, lowering overall noise and greatly enhances smear suppresion, considereing the small sensor size (1/3"-1/2")

Here is a blurp from a Panasonic brochure:
http://panasonic.andersholck.com/spatialoffset.gif

The Panasonic AJ-HDX400 has a 1280x720 60p CCD block and supports 1080i, using some clever upressing...

WOW!!!!!!!!!!

Unreal!!!!! I can't WAIT to see this puppy!! When is it scheduled to ship?? Any insider news?

- ShannonRawls.com

P2 cards....

P2 cards.....

P2 cards.....

PLEASE BE AFFORDABLE.....

PLEASE MAKE 2-HOURS WORTH OF RECORDING AFFORDABLE.....

ALL A BRUTHA NEEDS IS 2-HOURS.....

I WILL BE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU $6,999.99 FOR THE CAMERA AND 2-HOURS!!!!!

P2 cards.....

P2 cards......

P2 cards.....

*smile*

- ShannonRawls.com

Great stuff isn't it?! :D

You could (theoretically) use this camera for years - much longer than an average electronics life span.

I think there will be options for hard disk recording (I believe Panasonic has something on their website a while back) so that should hold most people over until P2 enters their budget range I would think. Hope I'm not wrong!

"The Panasonic AJ-HDX400 has a 1280x720 60p CCD block and supports 1080i, using some clever upressing..."

Is this confirmed?
Is there a link to this info?

"You could (theoretically) use this camera for years..."

Ha! Who are you kidding? We'll all be drooling over the new SuperExtremeHighDefinition camera that will come out NAB 2007. (2009 for Canon.)

Kevin

<<<-- Originally posted by Luis Caffesse : [i]Is this confirmed?
Is there a link to this info? -->>>

The Aj-HDX400 is a full size camcorder.

The new small one is the HVX200.

Isn't it HVX200?

Quite true Kevin :D. I'm talking pragmatically though. With SD there was a limit to how far you could go. With this however, improvements will surely be made but this should last about as long as the XL1 I would think a good 6 years maybe?

Honestly though, where do we go next? I can't even begin to imagine what Panasonic will be releasing a few years from now. Do we go scope? Greater latitude? Larger chips? More pixels? HD3D?

Nah. The equipment becomes so good and owned by everyone, that we all start getting less excited about it and more focused more on good writing and good ideas.

A man can dream...

Kevin

(PS-On a serious note, this is all very much following what happened in the audio world over the past 15 years. In mid-80's I was so thrilled to be recording on 4-track recorders...than 8-track recorders. Now? It's not about the equipment at all. Anyone can record a technically decent signal into a computer. BUT, is music any better than 15 years ago? I sure don't think so...)

> If you start with a 4:4:4 image and use pixel shift
> you will end up with an image at 4:2:2 no matter
> how it is encoded.

Yep. So... who cares if pixel shift is used when it's going to be encoded at 4:2:2 anyway? I don't. Especially if, by using pixel shift, better sensitivity and s/n is obtained, not to mention an easier to make (read: less expensive) sensor array.

Now the only thing I want is to have an option to pop a hard drive into the P2 slot instead of solid state memory. Should be much less expensive.

"The Panasonic AJ-HDX400 has a 1280x720 60p CCD block and supports 1080i, using some clever upressing..."

Well that would get us to 1920 x 1080 with pixel shift. You get 1.5X the luma pixels with pixel shift. This would give us a 1080i/p image with 1920 x 1080 luma pixels and only 1280 x 720 chroma pixels or a 3:2:2 natural image. The codec would then bring that down to 1920 x 1080 for luma and 960 x 540 for chroma or 4:2:2I guess that isn't that bad. It sure beats 4:1:1.

Even if the new Panasonic camera uses pixel shift for 1080i/p that sure beats the SONY Z1 trying to jump up to 1920 from only 960.

Even for those who love pixel shift you have to admit starting with 1280 instead of 960 pixels is much better when trying to get to 1920.

"The Aj-HDX400 is a full size camcorder.

The new small one is the HVX200."



That's what I get for not reading carefully.

Boy is my face red!
:)



"It's not about the equipment at all. Anyone can record a technically decent signal into a computer. BUT, is music any better than 15 years ago? I sure don't think so..."

That is true, as a blanket statement.
Music overall may not be better than it was 15 years ago, but I guarantee you there are people recording incredible music today that would not have had the means to do so 15 years ago.

So, you are right, these technological leaps don't automatically equal better content, not at all. But I'll bet that out of the thousands of cameras that are sold this year, at least one person will make something interesting, genuine, and possibly brilliant. And that same person may not have done so if they couldn't afford it before.

I'm a bit worried about no mention of 3ccd's... And more, I'm really worried about the lens- One of the things I liked most in my DVX was the fantastic LEICA DICOMAR lens it had- the colors, the sharpness, the amazing detail and, again, the Colors where what sold me- a million time better than the plain sony lens of my PD-170...